Denied accreditation: Accreditation is denied when the Brief, coupled with the auditors’ findings, fails to support the program faculty’s claims, and there is little likelihood that additional evidence and analysis would indicate the faculty’s claims about the quality principles could be warranted.

Disclaimer opinion: A rating by the auditors that indicates that the evidence could not be audited because it was not available for auditing or that the TEAC auditors were not given access to the evidence related to more than 75 percent of the targets assigned to an element or component.

Element: In the TEAC system, an element (0.0 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, or 4.0) describes the criteria for candidacy, Quality Principle I, Quality Principle II, Quality Principle III, and to the components of Capacity for Quality.

Evidence: The body of fact and analysis that meets the standards of contemporary scholarship and warrants the claims and assertions made by the program faculty about each of the quality principles. TEAC requires that programs provide evidence that their students have learned (1) the subject matter they will teach, (2) the subject matters of the field of education, and (3) how to teach. In addition, programs must show that the way they warrant student learning is valid. The faculty must show that they use what they learn about their students’ learning to improve the program and the system they have in place for ensuring the quality of the program.

Return to Glossary